HR Clinton and McCain Honestly Win???? Impossible!
Clinton makes statistically statistical prediction violating "comeback" -- and so even more astonishingly does her dream 'pushover' opponent 'Manchurian John' McCain -- soon to be known as "hamburger McCain" if he really becomes the GOP choice.
machines.
| Clear Evidence Of Widespread Vote Fraud In New Hampshire Paul and Obama cheated out of 3rd and 1st by voting machines, hand count fraud |
|
Paul Joseph Watson Wednesday, January 9, 2008 http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/january2008/010908_widespread_fraud.htm |
|
There were several major vote fraud issues to arise out of the New Hampshire primary revolving mainly around Ron Paul and Barack Obama, who were both seemingly cheated out of third and first places respectively as a result of rigged Diebold voting machines and deliberate malfeasance in the counting of hand-written paper ballots.
- Obama had a 13 to 15 point lead over Hillary Clinton heading into the primary. Nothing occured that boosted Hillary's numbers immediately before the election, in fact immediately after the staged crying incident, many pundits argued it could only have harmed her chances. And yet Hillary somehow managed to instigate a near 20 point swing to defeat Obama by three per cent. If not for her 7% swing as a result of Diebold voting machines, Hillary would have lost to Obama. If Obama was struggling he would probably contest this bizarre outcome, but he is likely to accept the results simply to save face.
- The New Hampshire town of Sutton admits that it voided every vote Ron Paul received. The Congressman got 31 votes and yet due to a "human error," Sutton reported zero votes for Ron Paul. How "human error" can explain not counting 31 votes in succession for one single candidate is beyond the pale and Ron Paul's campaign should ask for a recount across New Hampshire immediately.
- As soon as people went public with the fact that their votes in Sutton had not been counted, other districts where Paul had supposedly received zero votes, such as Greenville, suddenly changed their final tallies and attributed votes to the Congressman.
- Going into New Hampshire Ron Paul was polling in the early teens and was a strong bet to take third place behind McCain and Romney. Four days before the vote, Rasmussen had Paul at 14% - a significant lead over Huckabee on 11% and Giuliani on 8% - and yet Ron Paul finished with just 8%. Proof of clear vote fraud, allied with the fact that Paul's numbers show a 6% swing from normally accurate pre-polling forecasts, clearly indicate chicanery was at hand, especially considering the fact that Paul lost those crucial few percentage points to Giuliani as a reuslt of electronic Diebold voting machines which are known to be wide open to tampering and fraud.
- Going purely on hand-counts, which as we saw in Sutton were by no means angelic but at least harder to cheat on than Diebold voting machines without getting caught, Ron Paul would have won 15% of the vote and finished third. This figure would have more accurately correlated to the pre-primary polls rather than the ridiculous 8% he was eventually given.
- Numerous districts reported totals of anything up to 22% for "other candidates". What on earth does this black hole of "other candidates" mean? How can one vote for a candidate that is not on the ballot without spoiling the ballot paper? The district of Lisbon reported 22.5% votes for this mysterious "other" candidate, while in the large district of Londonderry, the "other" candidate received 10%. Many are now alleging that these "other" votes were merely siphoned from Ron Paul to keep his final number low.
- Rudy Giuliani, the 9/11 candidate who beat Ron Paul thanks to the aid of a 3% swing on Diebold voting machines, received 9.11% of the vote in three different towns. Coincidence or somebody's idea of a sick joke?
Hand Count Shows 15% For Ron Paul
That’s 14.8373% out of the 30 districts, or townships. Ron Paul won 3rd place. The electronic polls are fixed.
This would have placed Dr. Paul in 3rd place, just as the polls were showing before the primary…
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/23643
The computer counted votes are the problem.
Not a single hand count township showed less than 10%
Supposedly, Ron Paul got 8% - this does not make sense.
richmond is hand count 34% for Dr. Paul…100% reporting
lyman is hand count 28.7% for Dr. Paul…100% reporting
Orange is hand count 25% for Dr. Paul…100% reporting
Harts location is hand count 25% for Dr. Paul…100% reporting
wentworth is hand count 24% for Dr. Paul…100% reporting
goshen is hand count 17.68% for Dr. Paul…100% reporting
marlow is hand count 16.6% for Dr. Paul…100% reporting
cornish is hand count 14.8% for dr. Paul…100% reporting
Rumney is hand count 14.5% for Dr. Paul…100% reporting
croydon is hand count 14 % for Dr. Paul…100% reporting
dorchester is hand count 13.89% for Dr. Paul…100% reporting
effingham is hand count 13% for Dr. Paul…100% reporting
albany is hand count 12.9% for Dr. Paul…100% reporting
antrim is hand count 12% for Dr. Paul…100% reporting
south hampton is hand count 12% for Dr. Paul…100% reporting
sullivan is hand count 12.61% for Dr. Paul…100% reporting
troy is hand count 12.21% for Dr. Paul…100% reporting
mason is hand count 11.88% for Dr. Paul…100% reporting
newport is hand count 11.45% for Dr. Paul…100% reporting
charlstown is hand count 11.3% for Dr. Paul…100% reporting
Allenstown is hand count 11.16% for Dr. Paul…100% reporting
bristol is hand count 11% for Dr. Paul…100% reporting
warren is hand count 11% for Dr. Paul…100% reporting
Strafford is hand count 11% for Dr. Paul…100% reporting
washington is hand count 11.02% for Dr. Paul…100% reporting
lancaster is hand count 10.9% for Dr. Paul…100% reporting
springfield is hand count 10.6% for Dr.Paul…100% reporting
wilton is hand count 10.37% for Dr. Paul…100% reporting
Northfield is hand count 10.3% for Dr. Paul…100% reporting
mont vernon is hand count 10.25% for Dr. Paul…100% reporting
------------------
Vote Fraud - Paper vs. Electronic Ballots
by Michael Collins
Does Obama's highly favorable corporate media image stack up against reality? Is this the end of Hillary, or at least the beginning of the end? Can Edwards kick in the door with a strong showing and demand coverage? Will Ron Paul embarrass Giuliani by edging him out for fourth?
We'll never know for sure.
Why? It's been nearly eight years since the debacle of Florida and nearly six since the miracle Chambliss win against Cleland. Surely we have reliable, verifiable voting systems in place? It's been almost four years since the nationwide disaster of the 2004 election with irregularities still emerging.
Hasn't all this been fixed?
You'd think so. But, the answer is definitely no. Votes are still taken by voting machines produced by vendors highly sympathetic to the Republican Party. The machines are still off limits to those who want to examine how they operate and observe real vote counting. And good luck if your candidate loses and there's fraud or voting machine problems suspected.
You're out of luck. You can't hire outside experts to look at the mission critical software in the optical scanners (Sec. 1.5). You'll have a great deal of difficulty examining the paper records with voter marked choices. Don't count on seeing any recounts either. Almost all the states have high hurdles before you can request and get one of these simple verification tools (See Appendix 2).
Even with a relatively accommodating state like New Hampshire, only candidates can request a recount, but recounts are almost unheard of in presidential primaries. Citizens are not allowed to request and get recounts in the "granite state."
We may have 'paper records' with the paper forms counted by New Hampshire's optical scan voting machines, all made by Diebold. We surely don't have access to those forms unless there's a recount. The presence of 'paper records' with optical scans means nothing if citizens can't examine them directly; if citizens can't request and get a recount quickly. It's all in the hands of the candidates and parties despite the fact that the election belongs to the citizens.
Here's voting rights activist Nancy Tobi with an incredibly succinct analysis of New Hampshire's primaries and the 81% of votes counted by Diebold optical scanners.
*************
NH: "1st in the nation" with corporate controlled secret vote counting
By Nancy Tobi
Democracy for NH Article Link
81% of New Hampshire ballots are counted in secret by a private corporation named Diebold Election Systems (now known as "Premier Election Systems"). The elections run on these machines are programmed by one company, LHS Associates, based in Methuen, MA. We know nothing about the people programming these machines, and we know even less about LHS Associates. We know even less about the secret vote counting software used to tabulate 81% of our ballots. People like to say "but we use paper ballots! They can always be counted by hand!"
But they're not. They're counted by Diebold. Only a candidate can request a hand recount, and most never do so. And a rigged election can easily become a rigged recount, as we learned in Ohio 2004, where two election officials were convicted of rigging their recount. (Is it just a funny coincidence that Diebold spokesman is named Mr. Riggall?)
We need to get the count right on election night. Right now, nobody in New Hampshire, except the programmers at LHS Associates and Diebold Election Systems, knows if we are getting it right or wrong. Our state officials and representatives know this. They learned all about it when computer security specialists Harri Hursti and Bruce Odell testified before the legislative subcommittee on e-voting in September 2007 (Hursti's testimony is shown in this video). Scientific reports about the vulnerabilities and risks with Diebold optical scanners have been available since 2003.
We love our state. It takes courage and strength to admit where we are going wrong and to fix it. May our state officials and representatives find that courage and strength soon. Before we lose the other 19% of our votes.
END
This article may be reproduced in whole or part with attribution of authorship and a link to this article.
Writing and posting articles critical of the presidential candidate Rep. Ron Paul has cost ZioPedia.org a lot of sympathy in dissident circles. In fact, these days I receive more hate mail from fellow dissidents considering criticism of their new Messiah as blasphemy than I receive from fervent Zionists. I’m deeply disturbed by this child-like trust in a professional politician who is in the same party as the current U.S. president.
Ron Paul has red flags wrapped all around him.
1. Ron Paul doesn’t criticise the role of the Jewish lobby in America. At times when even Harvard professors and former presidents are writing books on the disastrous role of Jewish lobby groups in U.S. politics it is extremely suspicious for a ‘grass roots’ candidate – especially for one who strongly positions himself as a ‘patriot’ - to steer away from that debate. The argument, that he is afraid of the likes of AIPAC doesn’t convince me at all. If Ron Paul really let such fears influence his actions, he wouldn’t have voted repeatedly against bills providing financial support for Israel.
2. Ron Paul doesn’t criticise Israel for its policies of genocide and ethnic cleansing towards its native population. In fact, he consistently shows a very positive attitude towards Israel and refuses to use U.S. pressure or international mechanisms and institutions to hold the Jews-only state accountable for its illegal actions. If not the United States or the United Nations, who else will save the Palestinian people from enduring the same fate as 19th century Native American tribes?
4. Ron Paul wants to return to the gold standard, although such a measure would hand over control of the amount of money that can be issued to a handful of Jewish banks in the City of London. That’s like giving them control over the weather. By simply increasing or decreasing the price of gold, the Kosher Nostra could cause the U.S. economy - and all economies dependent on it - to boom or go into recession.
Ron Paul wants to be voted into the most powerful public office in the United States of America. One of the fundament features of power is that it comes hand in hand with responsibility for those affected by that power. Ron Paul however doesn’t want to use this power responsibly at all. He wants to hand over control over the U.S. economy to a bunch of greedy psychopaths. He wants to give the Zionist Mafia a free hand to do whatever they like with the Palestinian people. He wants to abolish whatever is left of a welfare system. To me he acts like someone who walks past a fire, a burglary or a rape, and doesn’t do anything to intervene.
http://www.rense.com/general79/your.htm
==========
Fraud in New Hampshire? S.C. to use voting machines banned in other states,
says Election Commission spokesman Chris Whitmire.
Chris Whitmire may be reached at
803 734-9060 CWhitmire@elections.sc.gov
If contact with Chris Whitmire results in no action, Gov. Mark Sandford may be contacted at 803 734-2100 mark@gov.sc.gov
"Those Who Cast the Votes Decide Nothing-
Those who Count the Votes decide everything"
Joseph Stalin
Electronic voting machines in Florida showed one candidate with negative votes.
Fraud in the central tabulator in New Hampshire?
This youtube shows the votes, when they were first released, as a town by town tabulation. This early release shows Ron Paul won.
DOWNLOAD THIS VIDEO AND SAVE IT. THIS IS HARD EVIDENCE.
01-09-2008 4:00 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8xgWjFe1cE
If you visit this site now, you will find that the results have been flipped to match the central tabulator:
http://www.boston.com/news/politics/2008/nh/nh_primary_gop_results_by_town/
Ron Paul - Now The Boston Globe Changed Their Story http://www.youtube.com:80/watch?v=Zu0Oaw9tIPM
Here is actual recorded testimony, given under oath,
by Clinton Curtis who admits that he wrote the program for vote fraud:
Rigged USA Elections Exposed
http://www.fliggo.com:80/video/sk0SiTCu
Nothing is an honest count unless it is in full view of the people. NO electronic vote counting machine does that.
http://www.charleston.net/news/2008/jan/07/s_c_use_voting_machines_banned_other_sta26854/
Associated Press
Monday, January 7, 2008
GREENVILLE — South Carolina election officials say they still plan to use touch-screen voting machines despite the fact that other states have banned the use of similar systems made by the same company.
Last month, top election officials in Ohio and Colorado declared that Election Systems and Software's iVotronic is unfit for elections.
The ban was prompted by a study done for the state of Ohio in which researchers found electronic voting systems could be corrupted with magnets or handheld electronic devices such as Palm Treos.
"We've reviewed the report and we remain confident in the security and accuracy of South Carolina's voting system," state Election Commission spokesman Chris Whitmire said.
But the South Carolina League of Women Voters has renewed its call for the state to record vote! s on paper as well as electronically to allow for accuracy checks, though there have been no documented cases of actual election tampering.
"It's very difficult to get evidence that somebody tampered with the vote if you have no way of knowing what the vote was before they tampered," said Eleanor Hare, a computer scientist who participated in a study of the machines by the South Carolina League of Women Voters.
The machines have been used statewide since 2006.
The Ohio study found the machines "lack the fundamental technical controls necessary to guarantee a trustworthy election under operational conditions."
"Exploitable vulnerabilities allow even persons with limited access — voters and precinct poll workers — to compromise voting! machines and precinct results, and, in some cases, to inject and spread software viruses into the central election management system," the report says.
However, the company that makes the machines says on its Web site that it disagrees with the Ohio report's technical findings.
"All of our voting systems have been thoroughly tested and examined under realistic election conditions before those systems are ever made available to states for additional testing and consideration," the company's statement says. "The testing and certification processes already in place are extremely rigorous, ensuring that voting systems meet well-established standards for performance under realistic election conditions."
--------------------------------
Can You Count on Voting Machines?
http://www.nytimes.com:80/2008/01/06/magazine/06Vote-t.html?ref=magazine
-------------
Voter Fraud Against Paul Confirmed in Sutton, N.H.
http://www.ronpaulwarroom.com/?p=655
http://www.ronpaulwarroom.com/? p=681
http://www.truthnews.us/?p=1587
By admin | January 8, 2008
Kurt NimmoTruth News
January 8, 2008
According to a post this evening on the Ron Paul Forums, vote fraud occurred in Sutton, New Hampshire:
Sutton with 100% reporting reported 0 votes for paul but poster in Sutton posted:
My mom, aunt, and dad all voted for RP today in my hometown, My mom and aunt both work passing out ballots, and checking them off. I just looked at the politico map and it says their town has ZERO votes for Ron. Now i know that there isn’t corruption on voting in that little town, so where they reported it must be. What do I do, anyo! ne know???
Originally Posted by sstjean View Post
This was posted to ronpaul-801 tonight: “This town numbers are wrong wrong wrong on this map. I am from Sutton originally and my parents and one aunt all voted for Ron Paul today and Sutton says 0. So this is wrong. This is a town that had 20 people counting the ballots and I have no reason to believe that they cheated. Small town and I was born and raised there. The real numbers will come in by morning. The electronic machines in the big towns are the ones we have to worry about.”
Earlier in the day, Brad Blog reported other suspicious behavior:
Our Spidey-sense started tingling before going to bed last night and hearing reports, on MSNBC, that there were 17 paper ballots cast in Dixville Notch, NH’s midnight, first-in-the-country voting. The report said that there were only 16 registered voters in the tiny voting precinct, yet 17 votes had been cast — suggesting that somehow, paper ballot “voter fraud” skullduggery was afoot.
Brad, however, believes the story is easily debunked:
Given that on! e of those reports seems to have begun on The DRUDGE REPORT earlier today, we’re not particularly surprised that the MSM kept repeating the easily-debunked stories running all day.
That, even while there are reasons to be concerned about how the paper ballots used in the New Hampshire Primary will actually be counted by the hackable Diebold optical-scan systems used in the state, as controlled and programmed by an outrageously bad private contractor there.
Of course, there is plenty of room for hank-panky, as ! Michael Collins notes:
81% of New Hampshire ballots are counted in secret by a private corporation named Diebold Election Systems (now known as “Premier”). The elections run on these machines are programmed by one company, LHS Associates, based in Methuen, MA. We know nothing about the people programming these machines, and we know even less about LHS Associates. We know even less about the secret vote counting software used to tabulate 81% of our ballots. People like to say “but we use paper ballots! They can always be counted by h! and!”
But they’re not. They’re counted by Diebold. Only a candidate can request a hand recount, and most never do so. And a rigged election can easily become a rigged recount, as we learned in Ohio 2004, where two election officials were convicted of rigging their recount….
In short, the stage was set by Diebold and Republican operatives to rig yet another election, as the above first-hand account seems to indicate.
---------------------
If any of these Urls do not open, use copy and paste into the address bar.
-------------------
hacking democracy”
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=hacking+democracy&search=Search
Hacking Democracy 1 of 9
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GzPXer7946E
Hacking Democracy 2 of 9
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eopnvw7mh_8&feature=related
Hacking Democracy 3 of 9
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lxGSXYUkplA&feature=related
Hacking Democracy 4 of 9
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJ9UuXF1hkA&feature=related
Hacking Democracy 5 of 9
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ht7fqoGUfS0&feature=related
Hacking Democracy 6 of 9
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3zp80H3pN0&feature=related
Hacking Democracy 7 of 9
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0VoEVvR60Sg&feature=related
Hacking Democracy 8 of 9
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSvhnXtogQ4&feature=related
Hacking Democracy 9 of 9
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J36Jfkxd1vA&feature=related
Diebold Demands HBO Cancel Film Hacking Democracy (Alex Jones report)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=okCdo87cv0o
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gBO8Bpv2ySg
Anyone can be Hacking Democracy in Florida Part 1
Anyone can be Hacking Democracy in Florida Part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FSOdthPoOeo
http://www.shadowvote.org/
HBO's Hacking Democracy Promo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7bkHPqSQX0
Hacking Democracy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3k-xL15jFzM
Got Vote?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGE_CmX8GuI
changing the ROMs of a Nedap e-voting computer in 60 seconds
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EowKalRT3lc
Ron Paul Votes Not Counted In New Hampshire District
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/january2008/010908_not_counted.htm
New Hampshire District Admits Ron Paul Votes Not Counted
Sutton t! ownship reported Congressman had zero votes, actual number was 31
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/january2008/010908_district_admits.htm
Where Paper Prevailed, Different Results
http://www.legitgov.org/nh_machine_vs_paper.html
99 Ways to Steal Elections: The Story of John Fund and Ron Paul http://howtheneoconsstolefreedom.blogspot.com/2008/01/99-ways-to-steal-elections-! story-of.html
__._,_.___
__,_._,___